This debate was much more disorderly than the first with multiple instances of candidates inaudibly talking over each other. I will say that I didn't think Nikki Haley or Vivek Ramaswamy won the night as they may have done after the first. Nikki Haley seemed spoiling for a fight, not just with Vivek but with Sen. Scott and others (including DeSantis).
I did think that Ron DeSantis had a decent eloquent talking point stressing his conservative bona fides. (However, DeSantis continues to be dogged by a statement in the Florida black studies curriculum suggesting that some slaves personally benefited in the post-emancipation economy from acquired trade skills while in servitude. DeSantis described the kerfuffle as a VP Harris hoax. I have no doubt any kind of job experience can be fungible in a free economy, which does not exonerate the unjust means of servitude. DeSantis defended the disputed statement as written by a well-regarded black scholar. Sen Scott self-righteously pointed out that slavery cannot be justified. Personally, I think DeSantis should have conceded the point and moved on) Pence and Burgum forcefully espoused principled federalism. Burgun also made a compelling case about the oversized federal workforce being a source of inefficiency and waste. Haley and DeSantis directly criticized the federal debt runup under Trump. Tim Scott called for a balanced budget amendment. [However, a POTUS has no role in the amendment process, and Dems would block a super-majority in either chamber of Congress.]
One interesting Haley criticism of DeSantis dealt with his NIMBY policies on energy development, particularly offshore Florida. (Florida residents and tourism industry oppose perceived threats t their pristine beaches.) DeSantis tried to justify the contradictory policy over his advocacy in others' backyards by pointing out state constitutional restrictions, But Haley points out DeSantis position predated the amendment and fracking is distinct from drilling
I was highly concerned about DeSantis and others' obsession with fentanyl and its alleged link to the border crisis. One horror story from DeSantis about a baby in Florida dying from fentanyl ingestion seems to go beyond established facts. However, the link between migration and the fentanyl crisis is factually dubious, with less scrutinized US citizens being predominantly prosecuted and convicted. In part, government prohibitions, e.g., against opioids, play a role; none of these failed war on drugs tactics address the market demand for pain management. (Note that I have never transacted in illicit drugs and personally oppose and advocate against their use; I simply don't think prohibitions are good public policy.) I am deeply concerned over DeSantis' all-too-eager willingness to deploy the military against sites in a sovereign foreign border nation. And I am also concerned about increasingly hawkish China bashing, in part to China's alleged involvement in the fentanyl global supply chain. China bashing exacerbates the issue of Chinese export restrictions.
The candidates continued to mostly sidestep conflict with Trump beyond some swipes over border control, fiscal conservatism and yes, Christie, "ducking" the debate. Ramaswamy argues that Trump is the "best" POTUS of the 21st century, but he is better able to sell Trumpism to the younger generations. I still think they are repeating the 2016 primary campaign's strategic error in failing to confront Trump, hoping to win his supporters if and when he crashed and burned. There is, of course, the possibility that a Trump conviction could transform the race, and it's easier to play the rebound if you are already in it. Still, if you buy into Trump's talking point that his prosecutions are politically motivated, you are undermining your own candidacy.
I still don't understand the moderators' choices of questions, particularly over education, which constitutionally should be a state/local vs. federal issue. Ramaswamy suggested devolving federal resources to the states. I think a number of (past or current) governors pointed out their own records, although only Christie had to deal with a blue legislature, and top-down policy contradicts local authority. In general, as George W. Bush discovered, success at the state level doesn't translate to the federal level and the hyperpolitical divide
I would have thought with a looming government shutdown, an approaching exhaustion of senior entitlement trust funds, trade conflicts and public spending and easy money Fed policies exacerbating inflation, you would have heard other questions, maybe asking them how specifically their policies would contrast from Trump or Biden. I do give Ramaswamy credit for targeting the Fed and arguing about restricting their mandate to dollar stability.
It's probably naive for me to hope that a POTUS candidate would call for devolving authority back to Congress or the states, to downsizing the military, to privatizing or decentralizing most social spending, to expanding immigration and trade, to lowering regulatory barriers to market competition. I do think any of the people on stage would be an upgrade from Trump or Biden. Unfortunately, probably the best of the bunch, Burgum, won't even qualify for round 3.
